Episode Details

Back to Episodes
Not all super funds are created equal... so, here's what you should do

Not all super funds are created equal... so, here's what you should do

Season 1 Episode 24 Published 8 years, 1 month ago
Description
The Productivity Commission released its draft report this week into the efficiency of the Australian superannuation system. Its findings are concerning, and all Australians must take an active role in choosing the most appropriate superannuation fund for them. If you don’t, the Productivity Commission suggests it could cost you between $61k and $407k, depending on your age.
What the productivity commission found
The productivity commission found that many superannuation funds recommended by employers failed to deliver adequate investment returns. They described it as a bit of a lottery. That is, if you’re lucky enough to land in a good fund, chances are you could be several hundred thousand dollars better off.
Also, they were critical of the fees scales that the superannuation industry is charging. They noted that whilst the industry has grown significantly in size, that that growth hasn’t translated to economies of scale.
Finally, another key finding was that many Australians have multiple superannuation accounts which attract separate fees and erode retirement savings.
So, how do you know if you’re in the right fund? Let’s have a look at your options.
A retail fund is not a good option
A retail superannuation fund is one that is operated by a for-profit business such as MLC, AMP, ANZ (OnePath) and the like. These products are almost always more expensive and deliver inferior investment performance (as noted by the Productivity Commission).
If you’re in a retail superannuation fund, typically, my advice is to move your super into a better option. Of course, before switching your super you must understand the repercussions of doing so as it could impact your benefits, insurance and so on. The best thing is to get independent advice.
A Self Managed Super Fund (SMSF) is probably not a good option either
SMSFs are the largest sector of the superannuation industry representing about one third of superannuation savings. I believe, SMSFs are over-recommended by accountants and financial planners.
Assuming that you don’t have complex financial affairs, significant wealth, estate planning challenges or any other complexity, the only reason you would need a SMSF is if you wanted to invest in direct property. If you don’t want to invest your super in direct property, then there are superior lower-cost and simpler solutions for your superannuation.
Many prospective clients that I come across that have a SMSF are typically under invested. That is, the SMSF holds a lot of cash that is yet to be invested. This is a good indication they set up the fund without a clear strategy. Therefore, before you establish a SMSF, make sure you have a clear investment strategy in mind so that you can maximise your super fund’s performance.
Industry super fund
Industry super funds are not-for-profit businesses. However, I feel a more apt description of them is not-for-productivity. Whilst industry super funds are typically a better option than retail and SMSFs, I do have some concerns with their transparency and productivity. The Productivity Commission also shares similar concerns to me.
In the past, I have written about the industry funds lack of accountability in reporting and comparing investment returns. In addition to these concerns, the problem with a not-for-profit business is that the absence of a profit motive is worthless if there is no focus on productivity.
For example, it is common knowledge in the financial services sector that industry super funds tend to pay a higher salary compared to the salary that would be offered by the corporate sector for the same role. In fact, a recruitment executive that I have <
Listen Now

Love PodBriefly?

If you like Podbriefly.com, please consider donating to support the ongoing development.

Support Us